EPTI personally think it is as simple as worker vs army production for Zerg. With Protoss and Terran, you CAN be fairly mindless (of course there are exceptions) and make a worker every time the previous one finishes building. Zerg have to be more intelligent about it and decide whether a worker or army unit is a more important use of the larva. Personally as a low level player I find this hard to figure out the right balance and I would bet even fairly strong players would struggle with this to a certain extent. Of course there are many other factors which could attribute to these stats, but I have to believe this is a major one. And if Blizz tried to affect these stats by making Zerg stronger then it likely would just lead to Zerg rule in the pro scene since they are likely making good decisions already when it comes to worker vs army and any change to significantly change the stats would likely put the pro Zergs over the top in tournaments.
Trying to make sense of the stats - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
fyndor
United States159 Posts
I personally think it is as simple as worker vs army production for Zerg. With Protoss and Terran, you CAN be fairly mindless (of course there are exceptions) and make a worker every time the previous one finishes building. Zerg have to be more intelligent about it and decide whether a worker or army unit is a more important use of the larva. Personally as a low level player I find this hard to figure out the right balance and I would bet even fairly strong players would struggle with this to a certain extent. Of course there are many other factors which could attribute to these stats, but I have to believe this is a major one. And if Blizz tried to affect these stats by making Zerg stronger then it likely would just lead to Zerg rule in the pro scene since they are likely making good decisions already when it comes to worker vs army and any change to significantly change the stats would likely put the pro Zergs over the top in tournaments. | ||
|
Oleksandr
United States227 Posts
| ||
|
MasterJack
Canada215 Posts
On January 19 2011 09:02 Firearm wrote: QFT In addition, based on the fact that Blizzard's reports have in the past shown win% of each race against each race on each map in the past - if such a massive differential existed across the board, they would have at least acknowledged in by now. In addition, do the OP's figures take into account the weighting of each race at this level? The problem with this win% argument is the skill differential between Z and other races, at least at lower levels. Everyone is matched so they win 50% of their games. More skill as a zerg may place you against much less skilled Terran players. Not saying this is the case, but it's what I noticed switching from mid-diamond toss to now platinum zerg. Of course as someone else stated, top-skill balance is what blizzard is focused on, so the imbalance at lower skill levels is expected. | ||
|
kerminator
Austria75 Posts
| ||
|
Dragar
United Kingdom971 Posts
On January 21 2011 01:51 Duban wrote: To be fair, a lot of those are from a time where the strategies and patches are now considered obsolete. Lets do some math on the OP's statistics, shall we? Lets assume that all 3 races have an equal chance of winning a tournament. This is a binary distribution with each race having a 1/3 chance of winning a tournament, ideally. The likelihood of any given outcome where a race, in this case zerg, wins only 7 tournaments can be expressed as Zerg: (1/3)^7*(2/3)^(85-7=78) = 8.4145 * 10^-18. Of course there are 85C7=4,935,847,320 ways this could occur. The probability of this event is .000000042. If all possibilities were equal one would expect an average probability of 1/85 = .01176. In short, it is extremely unlikely that this would happen by chance. The problem though is that the probability of the data, given the model, is not the probability of the model, given the data. Just because the probability of that event is extremely unlikely (the probability of the data) given equally balanced races (the model), does not mean that the probability of the model being correct is extremely unlikely. | ||
|
Jameser
Sweden951 Posts
this I think stems from scouting; zerg and protoss need to devote overlord/supply and tech respectively to scout while terran merely has to temporarily give up an innate income advantage | ||
|
qxc
United States550 Posts
| ||
|
Dont Panic
United States194 Posts
On January 21 2011 22:11 qxc wrote: why did you include zerg players in the op. You didn't really mention why it's even relevant that zerg players have a higher win % vs. other zergs. Because its true for all races. Average winrate against ALL players = 59.5 I think this is because some of the wins are from people who are not counted in the TLPD | ||
|
SedativeDev
Slovenia316 Posts
If Zs cant play anything but bling into mutas (happens allot in gold) or mass roach that doesn't mean that zergs are UP. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
On January 21 2011 22:52 SedativeDev wrote: omg. this threads are really gettin annoying. And it's allways zerg players who are whining. Those representation of wins on tournaments are not right. Do you take in count how many players of each race was represented on a tourney? well if it's like 10T 4P 2Z on tourney u can't expect for zerg to win. well if it wins i would say that Z is OP... If Zs cant play anything but bling into mutas (happens allot in gold) or mass roach that doesn't mean that zergs are UP. Why do you think there are less players in the tournaments then? | ||
|
Leviwtf
174 Posts
On January 21 2011 23:03 1Eris1 wrote: Why do you think there are less players in the tournaments then? Because most people don't like to play the alien race, this is true for most games that include human like races and alien races. Not only that, many people don't like the larva mechanic because its harder to play with (most ppl starting off tend to shy away from it, so as a result their initial player pool is less). Also, the campaign in SC2 was only Terran so people stick to the race they know. This has all been said before... | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
On January 21 2011 23:11 Leviwtf wrote: Because most people don't like to play the alien race, this is true for most games that include human like races and alien races. Not only that, many people don't like the larva mechanic because its harder to play with (most ppl starting off tend to shy away from it, so as a result their initial player pool is less). Also, the campaign in SC2 was only Terran so people stick to the race they know. This has all been said before... Man, people who play on higher/high level do not really care about "allien" race and about campaign. All you say is for begginers and not for skilled players. Or do you think most high level terrans take terran because they played humans in campaign? lol | ||
|
cozzE
Australia357 Posts
But honestly, get out of here with your ridiculous statistics and your stupidity, they reflect nothing at all about the matchup currently. T hasn't won many tournaments at all recently either, the last notable/large-scale competition that was won by T was by Jinro at MLG. Since then its been Z and P mostly, but do we see silly posts about them? Hardly. | ||
|
Genzo
Denmark207 Posts
1st there was a Ultralisk bug in the game at that time 2nd there was no jungle basin map | ||
|
Heimatloser
Germany1494 Posts
On January 19 2011 09:04 Highways wrote: If you look at the big tournaments, it's pretty even http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Major_Tournaments major tournament on team liquid wiki = tournament with liquid participants | ||
|
xzidez
Sweden147 Posts
To be honest, if the game were perfectly balanced the ammount of zerg players should be equally distributed all over the board. So if 30% of the players are playing zerg in bronze, also 30% of the master league players should be zerg. But thats not the case. All leagues from platinum and down is represented by about 20% zerg players. Where they have almost 30% in master and diamond. In other words zerg is overrepresented in the higher leagues. I do however admit that its disturbing that terrans are so highly represented in tournaments.. But that should not be the concern of the most players here. The race you picked is probably not whats holding you back from entering GSL. | ||
|
roadrunner343
148 Posts
On January 21 2011 23:30 xzidez wrote: I seriously dont get why Z are whining so much. To be honest, if the game were perfectly balanced the ammount of zerg players should be equally distributed all over the board. So if 30% of the players are playing zerg in bronze, also 30% of the master league players should be zerg. But thats not the case. All leagues from platinum and down is represented by about 20% zerg players. Where they have almost 30% in master and diamond. In other words zerg is overrepresented in the higher leagues. I do however admit that its disturbing that terrans are so highly represented in tournaments.. But that should not be the concern of the most players here. The race you picked is probably not whats holding you back from entering GSL. Worst argument I've ever seen. Balance does not equal preference. Even when the game is perfectly balanced, if there may still be fewer Zerg players than all the other races. Race distribution is not the sole indicator of balance. More people just like the terran and protoss races. | ||
|
AcOrP
Bulgaria148 Posts
| ||
|
Ratel
Canada184 Posts
why every second thread here somehow indicates how zerg is UP while its one of the most cost efficient races | ||
|
Shuffleus
Australia764 Posts
On January 21 2011 23:19 cozzE wrote: Great, another Z fanboy trolling T/P players, great stuff to read! ..... But honestly, get out of here with your ridiculous statistics and your stupidity, they reflect nothing at all about the matchup currently. T hasn't won many tournaments at all recently either, the last notable/large-scale competition that was won by T was by Jinro at MLG. Since then its been Z and P mostly, but do we see silly posts about them? Hardly. How can you be so certain of an opinion that is so easily disproved... I've seen both sides of this argument against and for balance, and i can see how people come to the conclusions they do but i will however say this as my one and only statement on Balance: No matter the amount of statistics you read or complaints and issues people bring up people will always find an position to argue from in favor of the stance that they've already taken. It's so easy to read a complaint and say "no, that's wrong" or "your argument is flawed as it doesn't take into account XYZ" and i don't think it's possible to find an argument that can account for everything. However there is one statement that i can say with 100% certainty in this argument: If you played this game as Zerg at the highest level since release and were an intelligent player that adapted and studied each match-up: There is absolutely no way you would think that Zerg balanced. I've never met a Single Zerg at the top tier that doesn't believe that, on EU or US, and I don't think i will for quite some time. You may get "QQ posts" by the dozen, but i can assure you many of the players who play in these tournaments, who are competitors at the highest level don't post here, don't contribute to the mess because we already know the issues; there is no arguing left to be done. Telling someone who will never understand because he is merely a bystander who sees less than the tip of the iceburg has no value to any of us. You will and can never sympathize with or understand the issues we face because you've never even come close to experiencing what we do. You see the result and it becomes a statistic that you argue for or against, locked up in forums. I actually play the games. WE play the games, and if you could feel the frustration we do for even a minute playing this race you would bite your tongue in your argument for balance. | ||
| ||
